When you get there, there's no such comment. As a guess, this OccNoVi account was taken over by someone with Administrator privileges, opened up for a program/bot to use for entry of more than 100 faked entries.

Then the bogus comments were erased after google indexed them. It's flat-out sabotage.

The subject matter retains interest. Did Mitt Romney accept membership in his community's Avenging Angels group? Did that happen when he was 16 which is a typical age for the beginning of membership?

Having google flooded with bogus entries makes it much more difficult for interested parties to find substantive discussion of this topic.

One additional anomaly: a google search with this argument [ romney ballot law commission site:occupywallst.org ] returns a very old page-image link.

Forum Post: Romney Tax Returns '98-'01 -- Perjury, Fraud & the ...
occupywallst.org/.../romney-tax-returns-2002-2004-utah-38000-frau...
12 posts - 5 authors - May 7
When Mitt Romney ran for governor in 2002, he swore under oath that he had been a resident of Massachusetts for the constitutionally required ...

In the most recent update to this page, the link found 56 comments.

One additional test comment was added to that posting today. We'll see how this goes.

-At least the front page is back up for occupywallst.org. That's a good change.-

A total of 119 bogus entries were made. These appear as comments to postings going back as far as October 2011. Earlier today the count was in the 130s.

These google-bomb excretions were deleted after being indexed on google. The google search makes it look like the connection between Romney and the Avenging Angel vigilante group look like a bot-driven flood at this site.

Why the perp decided to erase the comments is unclear. Maybe to make it harder to find ISP sourcing ???

I mean, it's certainly plausible to think some misguided conservative groups are spamming this site, but if OWS wants to maintain a public forum (which I think is certainly an excellent idea), then to a certain degree, this sort of thing is unavoidable. Obviously reasonable efforts should be made to get rid of spam, but beyond that ... I'm confident that most OWS supporters won't be influenced by this sort of thing. However, it's worth considering legal action wherever possible and feasible (assuming these claims can really be established, and a cause of action exists). Of course it's also possible that accusations of spam is itself spam?

There's no such thing as civil legal action for spam where it falls short of a DOS attack. These attacks, where limited and carried out with simple bots, are protected speech. However sabotage using an infiltrator and obtaining a root password is a crime.